Walt Disney Parks and Resorts tried to dismiss unlawful death claim with Disney+ subscription terms

In what’s been described as an ‘absurd’ move, Disney’s lawyers are trying to have an unlawful death case thrown out of a US court because the husband of the victim was a Disney+ subscriber.

Jeffrey Piccolo sued Walt Disney Parks and Resorts this year over the death of his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan in October 2023.

Ms Tangsuan, was allergic to nuts and dairy and ate at Raglan Road Irish Pub in the Orlando, Florida resort.

Mr Piccolo, Ms Tangsuan and her mother chose to eat at the restaurant due to Disney’s accommodating stance on serving people with allergies.

The server at the restaurant reportedly assured Ms Tangsuan that her dishes would be safe to eat, despite not having allergy-free flags in them, a practice common at many large-scale hospitality venues.

However, Ms Tangsuan started to experience breathing issues after leaving the restaurant and exploring a nearby Planet Hollywood.

An EpiPen was used, and Ms Tangsuan was taken to hospital but later declared dead.

Mr Piccolo is now seeking $75,000, which is the minimum required to file in the Florida Circuit Court, in damages. If the case needs to be decided by a jury, Mr Piccolo’s lawyer expects the damages to be increased to a much higher amount.

After lodging paperwork in February, the case took a concerning turn as Walt Disney Parks and Resorts suggested the case should be thrown out due to the terms and conditions of the in-home streaming app Disney+.

When an individual signs up for the streaming service, multiple boxes must be ticked, including a terms and conditions agreement, before a user can gain access to the platform.

In 2019, Mr Piccolo signed up for Disney+ using his Sony PlayStation console.

He claims to have had the service for less than a month, cancelling it within the free trial prepared.

Walt Disney Parks & Resorts have highlighted that when Mr Piccolo signed up for the streaming service, he “agreed to arbitrate ‘all disputes against,” against Disney.

The Disney lawyers said the Disney+ terms state: “When you create a Disney+ or ESPN+ account, you also agree to the Walt Disney Company’s Terms of Use,” and that those terms “govern your use of other Disney Services”. They claim that this expands across “sites, software, applications, content, product and services”

“Further litigation would only generate needless expenses and waste judicial resources,” Disney’s lawyers argued in their filing.

Mr Piccolo’s lawyers have slammed the response from lawyers for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, saying it was “fatally flawed”.

They said Disney’s position “is based on the incredible argument that any person who signs up for a Disney+ account, even free trials that are not extended beyond the trial period, will have forever waived the right to a jury trial enjoyed by them and any future Estate to which they are associated, and will instead have agreed to arbitrate any and all disputes against any and all Disney entities and affiliates, no matter how far removed from use of the Disney+ streaming service, including personal injury and wrongful death claims.”

“Frankly, any such suggestion borders on the absurd,” Piccolo’s lawyers wrote.

Disney’s lawyers said Mr Piccolo also agreed to “arbitrate” when buying tickets to the EPCOT (Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow) Orlando park.

Ms Tangsuan did not purchase the tickets, instead, her husband Mr Piccolo purchased the tickets for the couple her mother.

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts and Mr Piccolo are set to present their cases at a hearing on October 2.